Patterns of care and outcomes for stage IIIB non-small cell lung cancer in the TNM-7 era: Results from the Netherlands Cancer Registry

Utilisation of radiotherapy in lung cancer: A scoping narrative literature review with a focus on the introduction of evidence-based therapeutic approaches in Europe

Background and purpose

The aim of this study was to review the published studies on the utilisation of radiotherapy in lung cancer (both small and non-small cell lung cancer, SCLC and NSCLC) patients in European countries with a population-based perspective.

Material and methods

A literature search since January 2000 until December 2022 was carried out. Only English-published papers were included, and only European data was considered. PRISMA guidelines were followed. A scoping narrative review was undertaken due to the hetereogeneity of the published papers.

Results

38 papers were included in the analysis, with the majority from the Netherlands (52.6%) and the UK (18.4%). Large variability is observed in the reported radiotherapy utilisation, around 40% for NSCLC in general and between 26 and 42% in stage I NSCLC. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) shows a wide range of utilisation across countries and over time, from 8 to 63%. Similary, in stage III lung cancer, chemoradiotherapy (CRT) utilisation varied considerably (11-70%). Eleven studies compared radiotherapy utilisation between older and younger age-groups, showing that younger patients receive more CRT, while the opposite applies for SBRT. An widespreadlack of data on relevant covariates such as comorbidty and health-services related variables is observed.

Conclusion

The actual utilisation of radiotherapy for lung cancer reported in patterns-of-care studies (POCs) is notably lower than the evidence-based optimal utilisation. Important variability is observed by country, time period, stage at diagnosis and age. A wider use of POCs should be promoted to improve our knowledge on the actual application of evidence-based treatment recommendations.

Relationship between Treatment Plan Dosimetry, Toxicity, and Survival following Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy, with or without Chemotherapy, for Stage III Inoperable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Simple Summary

Various radiotherapy treatment methods are available for patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A multidisciplinary tumor board review is recommended to determine the best treatment strategy. In fit patients with inoperable tumors, concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) is preferred over sequential CRT (sCRT), due to better survival. Nonetheless, the use of cCRT in stage III NSCLC varies significantly, with concerns about treatment toxicity being a contributory factor. Many reports describing the relationship between overall survival, toxicity, and dosimetry in patients with locally advanced NSCLC are based on clinical trials, with strict criteria for patient selection, including good performance status, pulmonary function, etc. These trials have not always mandated the use of IMRT/VMAT. We therefore performed an institutional analysis to study the relationship between dosimetric parameters and overall survival and toxicity in patients with stage III NSCLC treated with IMRT/VMAT-based techniques in routine clinical practice.

Abstract

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) is the preferred treatment for stage III NSCLC because surgery containing multimodality treatment is often not appropriate. Alternatives, often for less fit patients, include sequential CRT and RT alone. Many reports describing the relationship between overall survival (OS), toxicity, and dosimetry are based on clinical trials, with strict criteria for patient selection. We performed an institutional analysis to study the relationship between dosimetric parameters, toxicity, and OS in inoperable patients with stage III NSCLC treated with (hybrid) IMRT/VMAT-based techniques in routine clinical practice. Eligible patients had undergone treatment with radical intent using cCRT, sCRT, or RT alone, planned to a total dose ≥ 50 Gy delivered in ≥15 fractions. All analyses were performed for two patient groups, (1) cCRT (n = 64) and (2) sCRT/RT (n = 65). The toxicity rate differences between the two groups were not significant, and OS was 29 and 17 months, respectively. For sCRT/RT, no dosimetric factors were associated with OS, whereas for cCRT, PTV-volume, esophagus V50 Gy, and contralateral lung V5 Gy were associated. cCRT OS was significantly lower in patients with esophagitis ≥ G2. The overall rate of ≥G3 pneumonitis was low (3%), and the rate of high-grade esophagitis the OS in this real-world patient population was comparable to those reported in clinical trials. Based on this hypothesis-generating data, more aggressive esophageal sparing merits consideration. Institutional auditing and benchmarking of the planning strategy, dosimetry, and outcome have an important role to play in the continuous quality improvement process.

Factors influencing multi-disciplinary tumor board recommendations in stage III non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

Treatment patterns in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) vary considerably between countries, for reasons that are not well understood. We studied factors influencing treatment decision-making at thoracic multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDT's) and outcome for patients treated between 2015-2017, at a regional network comprising 5 hospitals.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Details of all patients, including comorbidities, with stage III NSCLC were collected in an ethics-approved database. Weekly MDT's were conducted. The preferred radical intent treatments (RIT) for suitable patients were assumed to be concurrent chemoradiotherapy and/or surgery and other therapies were non-radical intent treatments (n-RIT).

RESULTS

Of 197 patients identified, 95 % were discussed at an MDT. RIT were recommended in 61 % of patients, but only 48 % finally received RIT. The estimated median OS was significantly better for patients undergoing RIT (28.3 months, CI-95 % 17.3-39.3), versus those who did not (11.2 months, CI-95 % 8.0-14.3). Patient age ≥70 years and a WHO-PS ≥2 were the most important predictors of not recommending RIT. Deaths due to progressive lung cancer within 2 years were observed in 36, 26 and 29 % of patients who received RIT, sequential chemoradiotherapy or radical radiotherapy. Corresponding comorbidity related deaths within 2 years were 3, 12 and 38 %.

CONCLUSION

A large number of patients who underwent MDT review were considered too old or not fit for RIT. More effective and better tolerated systemic treatments are required for patients presenting with stage III NSCLC.

Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for malignant mediastinal and hilar lymphadenopathy: a systematic review

Background

Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) safety and efficacy for mediastinal and hilar lymphadenopathy (MHL) is not yet established, given its potential for toxicity due to the proximity to esophagus and proximal bronchial tree (PBT). This review summarized current reported outcomes of MHL SABR.

Methods

This systematic review, based on the PRISMA guidelines, was performed using MEDLINE® (PubMed®), EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases from inception until December 2018. Studies reporting outcomes from SABR specifically for MHL from all primary malignancies were included. Non- English studies, guidelines, reviews, non-peer reviewed correspondences were excluded. Only the most recent publication and/or largest cohort from a single institution would be included for analysis.

Results

From the 222 studies identified, 4 retrospective studies totaling 196 patients were included in the analysis. One study included a small number of patients receiving non-ablative doses of stereotactic radiotherapy (RT). Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was the most common primary (65%), followed by breast (8%). Median follow-up ranged between 12 and 32 months. Reported dose and fractionation ranged from 21 to 60 Gy in 3–11 fractions, with median BED10 ranged from 46–106 Gy10. Three studies reported local control (LC) rates: study 1, 97% (1-year) and 77% (5-year); study 4, 88% (2-year); and study 2, 69% (6-month) and 66% (16-month). Pooled grade 3–5 toxicity rate according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.0 was 6% (n=11). Pooled SABR-related mortality (grade 5 toxicity) rate was 2% (n=4). Three SABR-related deaths from esophageal fistulae (2 to trachea, 1 to mediastinum) were reported, with all 3 having prior RT to the subcarinal nodes.

Conclusions

Our review suggested SABR for MHL to be feasible and effective, though there is a potential for serious toxicity especially in the re-irradiation scenario. Multi-institutional and/or prospective studies will help determine the therapeutic benefit of SABR in this high-risk treatment scenario.

Interdisciplinary multimodality management of stage III nonsmall cell lung cancer

Stage III nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) comprises about one-third of NSCLC patients and is very heterogeneous with varying and mostly poor prognosis. It is also called "locoregionally or locally advanced disease". Due to its heterogeneity a general schematic management approach is not appropriate. Usually a combination of local therapy (surgery or radiotherapy, depending on functional, technical and oncological operability) with systemic platinum-based doublet chemotherapy and, recently, followed by immune therapy is used. A more aggressive approach of triple agent chemotherapy or two local therapies (surgery and radiotherapy, except for specific indications) has no benefit for overall survival. Until now tumour stage and the general condition of the patient are the most relevant prognostic factors. Characterising the tumour molecularly and immunologically may lead to a more personalised and effective approach. At the moment, after an exact staging and functional evaluation, an interdisciplinary discussion amongst the tumour board is warranted and offers the best management strategy.

Delineating the pattern of treatment for elderly locally advanced NSCLC and predicting outcomes by a validated model: A SEER based analysis

INTRODUCTION

Locally advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) represented a highly heterogeneous group, with more than half of the patients aged ≥65 years at the time of diagnosis. However, the optimal treatment for elderly LA-NSCLC patients was still not defined.

METHODS

A total of 33530 elderly patients (≥65 years) diagnosed with LA-NSCLC from 2004 to 2014 were identified from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database.

RESULTS

Locally advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer patients aged 65-74 years were more frequently treated with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) (40%), while patients aged ≥75 years received more best supportive care (BSC) (36%). For age group of 65-74 years, patients who had surgery with or without (neo)adjuvant therapy had a median survival of 28 months, CRT 15 months, radiotherapy (RT) alone 6 months, chemotherapy alone 11 months, and BSC 3 months; while for patients aged ≥ 75 years, the median OS was 20, 13, 7, 9, and 2, respectively. Besides, independent clinicopathological factors were integrated into nomograms for OS and CSS prediction, C-indexes achieved 0.692 and 0.698, respectively. Importantly, the discrimination of nomogram was superior to that of the American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM classification (0.742 vs 0.572 for training set and 0.731 vs 0.565 for validation set).

CONCLUSION

For elderly patients with LA-NSCLC, the curative-intent treatment (surgery or CRT) conferred better survival compared to chemotherapy alone, RT alone and BSC. The proposed nomograms based on independent clinicopathological variables may be practical and helpful for precise evaluation of patient prognosis, and guiding the individualized treatment for elderly LA-NSCLC.

Radical radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy for inoperable, locally advanced, non-small cell lung cancer: Analysis of patient profile, treatment approaches, and outcomes for 213 patients at a tertiary cancer center

INTRODUCTION

Radical radiotherapy (RT) with curative intent, with or without chemotherapy, is the standard treatment for inoperable, locally advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the data for all 288 patients who presented with inoperable, locally advanced NSCLC at our institution, between May 2011 and December 2016.

RESULTS

RT alone or sequential chemoradiotherapy (SCRT) or concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) was used for 213 patients. Median age was 64 years (range: 27-88 years). Stage-III was the biggest stage group with 189 (88.7%) patients. Most patients with performance status (PS) 0 or 1 received CCRT, whereas most patients with PS 2 received RT alone (P < 0.001). CCRT, SCRT, and RT alone were used for 120 (56.3%), 24 (11.3%), and 69 (32.4%) patients, respectively. A third of all patients (32.4%) required either volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) or tomotherapy. Median follow-up was 16 months. The median progression-free survival and median overall survival (OS) were 11 and 20 months, respectively. One-year OS and 2-year OS were 67.9% and 40.7%, respectively. Patients treated using CCRT lived significantly longer with a median survival of 28 months, compared with 13 months using SCRT and RT alone (P < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, OS was significantly affected by age, stage group, treatment approach, and response to treatment.

CONCLUSION

RT including CCRT is feasible, safe, and well tolerated in our patient population and results in survival benefits comparable with published literature. CCRT should be considered for all patients with inoperable, locally advanced NSCLC, who are fit and have good PS.

Comparison of 7th and 8th editions of the UICC/AJCC TNM staging for non-small cell lung cancer in a non-metastatic North American cohort undergoing primary radiation treatment

BACKGROUND

We compared the performance of 7th and 8th edition of the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) / American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM staging for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in non-metastatic (stage I-III) North American cohort undergoing primary radiation treatment.

METHODS

Newly diagnosed NSCLC between (Jan 2011 - Dec 2014) were screened through a Canadian Provincial Cancer Registry. Clinico-radiologically and pathologically confirmed non-metastatic NSCLC undergoing primary radiation treatment were included. Kaplan-Meier methods, Cox proportional hazard regression and Akaike information criterion (AIC) were applied to evaluate discriminatory ability and prognostic performance of 7th and 8th edition of staging systems.

RESULTS

In this cohort of 295 patients, 8th edition stages IA3, IB, IIA, IIB, IIIA, IIIB, and IIIC showed progressive increase in the hazard ratio compared to best stage IA2 (8th edition IA3 vs IA2: HR 1.72; IB vs IA2: HR 2.04; IIA vs IA2: HR 2.66; IIB vs IA2: HR 2.91; IIIA vs IA2: HR 3.38; IIIB vs IA2: HR 3.62 and IIIC vs IA2: HR 8.22). In a multivariate model, 8th edition stage grouping had smaller AIC of 2342.08 compared to 7th edition 2349.55, confirming better performance. International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) map based nodal categorization N1, N2 and N3, showed good survival and hazard discrimination over stage N0 (1.39, 1.48 and 2.16 respectively).

CONCLUSION

In an independent cohort of non-metastatic NSCLC undergoing primary radiation treatment, improved performance of 8^th edition UICC/AJCC staging system over 7th edition was observed.

Bridging the gap between the randomised clinical trial world and the real world by combination of population-based registry and electronic health record data: A case study in haemato-oncology

Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) are considered the basis of evidence-based medicine. It is recognised more and more that application of RCT results in daily practice of clinical decision-making is limited because the RCT world does not correspond with the clinical real world. Recent strategies aiming at substitution of RCT databases by improved population-based registries (PBRs) or by improved electronic health record (EHR) systems to provide significant data for clinical science are discussed. A novel approach exemplified by the HemoBase haemato-oncology project is presented. In this approach, a PBR is combined with an advanced EHR, providing high-quality data for observational studies and support of best practice development. This PBR + EHR approach opens a perspective on randomised registry trials.